Do you trust nutritional information ?

JustDoIt987

Do you guys actually trust nutritional labels on packets etc? Or do you listen to your body and just stop eating when you are full? Asking this because sometimes companies change the nutritional values of their products . So Can we really be accurate with counting calories?

PAV8888

You're on a calorie tracking web site. If I was really good at "listening", I probably would not have gotten in need to be here.

That said neither counting calories nor counting exercise is ACCURATE. For that matter, measuring your weight is not an accurate indication of what is happening with your fat level either.

However, if you are CONSISTENT in how you measure you can always make adjustments over time.

What has been YOUR experience so far? Have you tried to set yourself a REASONABLE goal that doesn't create too large or too small of a deficit and eaten to it while recording food and exercise as accurately as possible?

smn888

I would not say the nutrition labels are accurate. However the variance is small enough to not matter for me. If you are really fit and micromanaging all the micronutrients and working to get a precise amount of body fat and muscle tissue you probably need to find a better way. Personally I just need to lose a buncha weight.... so counting calories and using a scale works well enough for me.

Duck_Puddle

Nutritional labels aren't 100%. My 0 calorie sweetener has 4 calories/packet. Everything in the world is not a 5 calorie unit. Depending on how things round, plus I believe labels can be off by 20% (not sure of that stat though). So labels aren't perfect. Calorie burns are also an estimate. Reasonably close on both sides-but not 100%.

That said-I ate 6,000+ calories on Saturday and was still hungry. So I'm going with the labels. No question.

Verdenal

I trust them to an extent. Many factors can affect the calorie and nutritional content of food and the companies are given some latitude. No, I absolutely do not rely on my body's ability to tell me when I've had enough. There are too many occasions when I've eaten too much for my height, weight, age, sex, and metabolism. Eating is pleasurable, so is over-eating.

kshama2001

When I weigh my food on a digital food scale, eat the calories MFP gives me, eat most (but not all) of my exercise calories, I lose as expected over the course of a month.

VintageFeline

kshama2001 wrote: »

When I weigh my food on a digital food scale, eat the calories MFP gives me, eat most (but not all) of my exercise calories, I lose as expected over the course of a month.

This for me and I don't weigh packaged items for the most part (chips and small things that multiples make up a serving are exceptions). They have a margin of error but they can't be way off legally. And certainly not on so many items you are eating regularly to make an impact.

lalepepper

Packaged items tend to have accurate calorie counts when they are presented in grams. I have found since weighing food that it is less reliable when measured by item, as some prepackaged items are heavier/lighter than their listed package weight.

Psychgrrl

JustDoIt987 wrote: »

Do you guys actually trust nutritional labels on packets etc? Or do you listen to your body and just stop eating when you are full? Asking this because sometimes companies change the nutritional values of their products . So Can we really be accurate with counting calories?

I honestly don't understand what one--trusting nutritional information on food labels, has to do with the other--eating intuitively.

GemstoneofHeart

I feel like you are comparing apples to oranges. Nutritional information and stopping when you are full are not even a little bit relatable. If you meant something else, please clarify.

I weigh pretty much everything I eat. For example, I ate an Amy's meal for dinner. I took a portion out and put some on my sons plate. The remaining I put on a tared out plate on my food scale. It came to 170 grams. The full package was 269 grams. Therefore I ate .63 of the package.

I was also full after eating it and didn't eat anything else after that. So I both trust my nutritional data to absolute fullest that is possible (nothing is perfect) and was also satisfied. Not the same thing.

jemhh

Psychgrrl wrote: »

JustDoIt987 wrote: »

Do you guys actually trust nutritional labels on packets etc? Or do you listen to your body and just stop eating when you are full? Asking this because sometimes companies change the nutritional values of their products . So Can we really be accurate with counting calories?

I honestly don't understand what one--trusting nutritional information on food labels, has to do with the other--eating intuitively.

I was thinking the same thing. The question doesn't make sense to me.

bpetrosky

In the US nutrition label calories can be +/- about 20% by the FDA labeling regulations. That's because many foods or ingredients can vary significantly. It doesn't matter in the long run because the variances tend to balance out if you log consistently accurately over time.

Package foods also tend to have more product than the 'net weight' on the package label. That's not a FDA responsibility, but a producer could get in trouble if they consistently had less product than the net weight with state or federal trade officials for shortchanging their customers. With multi-serving packages that's not a big issue since you weigh your serving and compare to the serving size on the label.

Single serving packages may have 5-10% more product than the net weight on the label, it helps to weigh these products if you eat them frequently. For example, some granola bars I get have a net weight of 42 g, and usually actually weigh about 50. Logging 1.2 servings corrects the package 190 calories to 228.

jaci66

I call them as I see them... they are guidelines.

CynthiasChoice

Listening to your body to tell you when you're full is a great habit and something that takes time to cultivate. Sometimes you can feel full because you've had a lot of liquid or fiber, though, and then you might get hungry before the next meal. If your schedule and your goals allow snacks, that's no problem. Stop when you're full and eat when you're hungry again. On the other hand, if you're trying to establish a three meal a day habit, you really want to make certain you're eating enough calories with the right macro balance at each meal.

I totally get your concern about nutritional labels. There is one frozen dinner that I love, but I don't eat it any more because I think it has WAY more calories and fat than the label states. Just by looking at it, you can tell there is a ton of cheese and white sauce! And I get sooo full after I eat it. The label says 350 calories and one serving per package, but it's huge, and I think it's more like 700 calories. The error will probably get corrected someday, but until then, I'm not eating it.

Personally, I think food companies must take advantage of the 20% margin of error allowance. It's kind of sad that I think most businesses are so unethical, but I just do. I try not to eat too much packaged food and when I do, I shoot for a lower daily calorie intake.

CynthiasChoice

I just remembered something. Back in the '80's there was a cereal called Almond Delight and I ate it almost every day on my diet because it was sweet and a cup was only something like 110 calories. I sometimes ate it twice a day because I wanted something sweet and 110 calories was great! I lost very slowly on that diet and plateaued for weeks and finally gave up. A few years later, I checked the label again and it was 225 calories per cup. It probably was always 225 per cup and that's one of the reasons I couldn't lose.

Orphia

I tend to trust the MFP food entries that correspond to the packet nutritional information. I always check if I'm scanning in a new food. (The calories, and the protein, at least.)

If I'm searching by text in the MFP database, I look for individual ingredients and entries that have "USDA" in the title, and make sure there are a few with the same calorie count before I choose one.

JustDoIt987

Psychgrrl wrote: »

JustDoIt987 wrote: »

Do you guys actually trust nutritional labels on packets etc? Or do you listen to your body and just stop eating when you are full? Asking this because sometimes companies change the nutritional values of their products . So Can we really be accurate with counting calories?

I honestly don't understand what one--trusting nutritional information on food labels, has to do with the other--eating intuitively.

Because you have to trust nutritional info on food labels to lose weight by counting calories. And i was asking if you'd rather do so , than learn how to eat intuitively and trust your body instead of counting calories and trusting labels. Sorry if I was unclear.

bpetrosky

JustDoIt987 wrote: »

Psychgrrl wrote: »

JustDoIt987 wrote: »

Do you guys actually trust nutritional labels on packets etc? Or do you listen to your body and just stop eating when you are full? Asking this because sometimes companies change the nutritional values of their products . So Can we really be accurate with counting calories?

I honestly don't understand what one--trusting nutritional information on food labels, has to do with the other--eating intuitively.

Because you have to trust nutritional info on food labels to lose weight by counting calories. And i was asking if you'd rather do so , than learn how to eat intuitively and trust your body instead of counting calories and trusting labels. Sorry if I was unclear.

They're still not related. Nutrition labels are a tool that have multiple uses:

• counting calories as already mentioned
• setting portion size expectations
• a reminder of the calorie density of a food (for example nuts or cheese)

When it comes to intuitive eating, a lot of people know that their body is a greedy lying sack of *kitten* and can't be trusted to tell them it's had enough. For many people, it takes training and habit to reset their concept of an appropriate portion size, and calorie counting is a tool to accomplish that.

A classic culprit is breakfast cereal where people find that the serving size is much less than their expected, is higher calories per serving, and for many people it does not keep them satiated until lunchtime. They could eat an equivalent calorie breakfast with more protein and fat, and feel quite satiated until lunchtime.

There's also the situation of hedonic eating, where a person eats more out of habit or boredom than hunger (such as having an afternoon snack at your desk at work). It has nothing to do with your body's sensation and more to do with your brain's need for stimulation.

jemhh

JustDoIt987 wrote: »

Psychgrrl wrote: »

JustDoIt987 wrote: »

Do you guys actually trust nutritional labels on packets etc? Or do you listen to your body and just stop eating when you are full? Asking this because sometimes companies change the nutritional values of their products . So Can we really be accurate with counting calories?

I honestly don't understand what one--trusting nutritional information on food labels, has to do with the other--eating intuitively.

Because you have to trust nutritional info on food labels to lose weight by counting calories. And i was asking if you'd rather do so , than learn how to eat intuitively and trust your body instead of counting calories and trusting labels. Sorry if I was unclear.

No you don't. Count your calories. After a reasonable period of time (4-8 weeks depending on the person) you evaluate your results and either keep eating the same number of calories, eat more calories, or eat fewer calories. Counting calories does not erase the need to adjust your intake based on results.

MegaMooseEsq

I think I've been (re)learning how to trust my body by relying largely on nutritional labels for the last year or so. As others have said, there are no certainties in this wacky calorie game, but once you've been tracking weight-loss-to-calorie-intake for a while, the patterns get pretty clear. I generally trust nutritional labels by weight, but not by portion: six triscuits is never x grams, for example, but I'm fine assuming that x grams of triscuits is y calories. I am most sceptical of restaurant nutritional information again primarily because of variance in portion size, and have gotten fairly good at getting a sense of if I need to round up given how full I feel after eating.

I feel comfortable saying that I will likely stop counting once I've moved into maintenance, but I place no judgment on people who need or want to continue. I eat very few highly processed foods, and I think those are the hardest for most of us to "intuitively" judge portion size. And of course, every person is different. I try not to worry about what works for other people, just worry about myself.

Lounmoun

JustDoIt987 wrote: »

Do you guys actually trust nutritional labels on packets etc? Or do you listen to your body and just stop eating when you are full? Asking this because sometimes companies change the nutritional values of their products . So Can we really be accurate with counting calories?

Does everyone need to count calories to achieve their goal of losing, maintaining or gaining weight? No.
Is calorie counting a useful tool for weight management? Yes.

I avoided counting calories for 15 years while trying to lose. My results were inconsistent and frustrating. I lost some weight but always regained what I lost. If I could stop eating when I felt full at exactly the right amount then I wouldn't need to calorie count. I can't go by feelings.

Using calorie information has been good enough for me to manage my weight more successfully. I have not found it to be wildly inaccurate based on my results. I have a good idea now of portion sizes that are appropriate for me. I have a better understanding of foods that make me feel satisfied for fewer calories.